Review
SOMEONE TO WATCH OVER ME. Deservedly forgotten?
Ridley Scott is a true titan of cinema. I won’t dwell on the obvious, since everyone knows what earned the British director that reputation. Though many see him merely as a cinematic craftsman, over the course of his career he has managed to gift audiences with at least a few touches of brilliance—moments invaluable to the legacy of film as an art form. Thanks to that, each of his new works is met with considerable interest, regardless of the potential it carries. Yet Scott’s filmography also includes titles that are lesser-known or entirely forgotten. One of them is the 1987 thriller Someone to Watch Over Me.
The film’s premise is rather conventional. Newly promoted detective Mike Keegan (Tom Berenger) arrives at a nightclub where a young, influential owner has been murdered. According to the only witness (Mimi Rogers)—a beautiful friend of the victim—the crime was committed by Joey Venza, a local gangster. Until the perpetrator is found and brought to justice, a police guard is assigned to protect the woman, with Keegan taking the night shift. Soon, the married detective begins to develop an intimate relationship with her.

The famous critic Roger Ebert once remarked that Someone to Watch Over Me feels like a film made on autopilot. It’s hard to disagree—Scott’s picture lacks both narrative and formal fireworks. If one criticizes Scott for being a director without a distinctive style, this 1987 film could serve as a fitting example of that accusation. However, that doesn’t mean it is entirely devoid of merit. Someone to Watch Over Me blends elements of classic film noir with the packaging of a thriller, though it works far better as a romance. Thus, my attention as a viewer was drawn to the dynamics of the love triangle—the main character, his wife, and his lover. I have the impression that within this triangle lies the true essence of the story.
It would seem that the protagonist has every reason to feel fulfilled as a middle-aged man. He has just been promoted at work, has a loving wife—with whom he still gets along wonderfully after years together—and a young son who seems destined to follow in his father’s footsteps. And then comes a woman capable of turning his entire world upside down. The man finds himself torn between fidelity to his wife and an overpowering fascination with another woman. Looking more closely at that passion, one can see that it has its reasons. Beneath the woman’s hypnotic charm lies her high social status, a striking contrast to the protagonist’s stagnant material life.

For the lost and besieged woman, on the other hand, Keegan becomes a much-needed source of support under the circumstances. When you think about it, the protector–protected dynamic lends itself naturally to an almost archetypal portrayal of romance. The man in this setup embodies strength and fulfills a primal need to ensure a woman’s safety. It’s hard to find a better model for depicting the essence of male–female relationships. But the victim of this arrangement, of course, is the detective’s wife, whose firm reaction cannot stop the growing passion between her husband and his lover. In the end, however, she is the one who triumphs—not only through her decisive actions, but through her moral victory.
The ending glorifies a love that is sworn, loyal, and enduring, while reducing that born of raw desire to the level of an illusory temptation before which many men remain helpless. Yet life, as we know, rarely carries so much optimism—turning the outcome of such blind choices into irreversible mistakes.

At the time of its release, Ridley Scott’s film received moderately positive reviews. However, that didn’t translate into box-office success. With a budget of $17 million, it earned only $10 million. Although it fared somewhat better in the VHS market, today it is mostly regarded as a flop—a film deservedly forgotten within the oeuvre of a great director. Still, looking at Scott’s filmography from today’s perspective, one can easily spot titles far more deserving of that fate.
